Video streaming service Hulu posted and quickly retracted an item on its official blog Thursday, in which the company stated that it doesn't see HTML5 in its immediate future.

Eugene Wei, vice president of product with Hulu, said that his company's contractual requirements make the transition to HTML5 too difficult. The current player on the website, built with Adobe Flash, does a great deal more than stream video.

"We continue to monitor developments on HTML5, but as of now it doesnt yet meet all of our customers' needs," Wei wrote. "Our player doesnt just simply stream video, it must also secure the content, handle reporting for our advertisers, render the video using a high performance codec to ensure premium visual quality, communicate back with the server to determine how long to buffer and what bitrate to stream, and dozens of other things that aren't necessarily visible to the end user."

Though Wei's comments were posted on Hulu's blog on Thursday, they were quickly taken down with no explanation given. But the text managed to circulate online before its removal.

The statement would seem to finally put to rest lingering rumors that Hulu might convert to HTML5 for an iPad-friendly site. But it does not mean that iPad users will not be able to access Hulu.

The company is still expected to bring its service to the iPad eventually, through software in the App Store much like the ABC and Netflix streaming players. It is believed Hulu on the iPad will be a pay-only service that would require a monthly subscription.

But the existing, popular ABC application shows programs like "Lost" and "Desperate Housewives" for free, with ad support. And that free product has apparently caused concern for Hulu, which is rumored to introduce a $9.95-per-month subscription plan later this month, on May 24.

It is believed that Hulu will incentivize its subscription plan with Apple's iPad, and also offer a "window" where content is available to subscribers, both on computers and the iPad, before it can be seen for free by the general public. Rumors have suggested Hulu's business partners -- the site is owned by the parent companies of Fox, NBC and ABC -- have pressured the service into subscription plans to "train" viewers that they should pay for online access to content.

Hulu no longer has content worth a crap so who cares if they stick with flash the rest of their existence. I boxeed my appletv over a year ago, but because hulu content gets worse and worse I no longer view it with the apple tv. It was a great idea, but powerful people must hate hulu because their content is worse and worse.

We don't really care about HTML5 when it comes to Hulu - we want H.264 and a dedicated app although if they don't get on it the content providers are going to realize that when it comes to the iPad (and hopefully iPhone soon) they can make more by just doing it themselves instead of going through Hulu...

We don't really care about HTML5 when it comes to Hulu - we want H.264 and a dedicated app although if they don't get on it the content providers are going to realize that when it comes to the iPad (and hopefully iPhone soon) they can make more by just doing it themselves instead of going through Hulu...

Flash is using h264 for its f4v container(you can put it in flv container using ffmpeg), except flash allows h264 to be played in many browsers that dont support h264 natively like firefox.

Are you upset at Apple too because the movies in their itunes store also have DRM?

Actually i'm not upset at either. Just observing the hypocracy of talking about being open and then delivering technologies for closed content. I know apple has DRM, but they don't go around saying they are the web. http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

Hulu now doesn't want to invest the time and resources into developing an iPad friendly version of their website because they now know they can't bleed iPad customers dry with a subscription plan. The "Hulu polls" all over the web have shown them that nobody is willing to pay a subscription fee for ad-ridden content that is already available for free. Trying to turn something that's already free into a fee-based service hasn't worked out well for anyone thus far.

Hulu is just being pissy because they've figured out that the "rich" Apple fanboys can't be easily exploited for their disposable income as they once thought. F*ck Hulu. Something better will soon replace them and make them irrelevant, anyway.

Actually i'm not upset at either. Just observing the hypocracy of talking about being open and then delivering technologies for closed content. I know apple has DRM, but they don't go around saying they are the web. http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

'Open' vs. 'Closed' is more a discussion of whether or not the platform is available to the community to evolve, patch, repair; whether it [the technology; not the product] is free-for-use and relatively unencumbered by patents—not a discussion of whether it is free, or freely available. There is absolutely nothing wrong with DRM on an open standard if that is what is necessary in order for business to take place—and that's exactly what is required in order for Hulu to exist and do what it does. The movie industry would not tolerate Hulu if people were finding ways to download the content to their computers for distribution.

So what are you really upset about? That Hulu won't let you download the movies and distribute them? That they make you watch an occasional commercial here and there? If so, don't use their service. It is free and has less advertising than television. Are you upset that they're not on the Apple bandwagon? If so, get over it. Are you upset at Adobe for being at odds with Apple here? If so, get over it—it's business, and Adobe has every reason to protect their platform (though they really should be looking to the future; Flash is going to play a diminished role in the internet whether they like it or not); and Apple also has very good reason to try and kill Flash.

That said, I understand Hulu's position here. HTML5 is awesome for embedding video and other basic tasks, and hasn't yet evolved enough to handle some of these more advanced things without considerable development or pioneering effort. Hulu requires much more of video on their site than simply to play, and they have to develop that solution in HTML5 if they want to move past Flash, which has been used for years to do what they're doing now. I imagine what they want to do is definitely possible; they've just made a financial decision (whether due to some suggestion or motivation from the likes of Adobe, legitimate complications, or both) and will change their tune when money tells them they're making a mistake.

The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good. Samuel Johnson

Actually i'm not upset at either. Just observing the hypocracy of talking about being open and then delivering technologies for closed content. I know apple has DRM, but they don't go around saying they are the web. http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/

I am not sure what you mean by "closed content" but I can watch the videos on Hulu for free (no pay) so I am pretty happy. Sure it's not on the ipad but that is what itunes is for.

if you read their statement they can't use it because they couldn't figure out how to get DRM. Thanks "open" adobe for sticking us with hulu's drm content!

more like thanks studios and networks. cause they are the ones that are demanding the DRM

as for the whole price thing. i'm waiting to see the price point and what it gets. if I'm paying $9.95 for the same 5 eps full of ads, no way. if I"m paying $9.95 for no ads beyond perhaps one at the very top and the whole season, then maybe.

Our player doesn’t just simply stream video, it must also secure the content, handle reporting for our advertisers, render the video using a high performance codec to ensure premium visual quality, communicate back with the server to determine how long to buffer and what bitrate to stream, and dozens of other things that aren't necessarily visible to the end user.

All that crap should be done on the server. Why is all that logic embedded in the player anyways? Heck, can it do my dishes too?

I admit to getting a little side tracked here. I have no trouble with with companies protecting theft. I wish there was a better way than DRM.

My main point is their relevance in this Flash/HTML5 debate. Who cares what they think if the deteriation of their content continues. Hulu was my favorite site a year ago and now I never visit because the really good shows have pulled away. IE Comedy central programming. There was a time when I could watch every episode of programs like 24, now you can only get to past 4 or 5. For example go to hulu and try to watch a Burn Notice episode. Sorry it doesn't exist. Something is clearly changing for the bad for them. Probably not their fault.

So if they continue this path of declining content, who cares what technologies they use because eventually nobody will go to their site anyway. Content Content Content!

This comes out right after the Adobe love letter and now Hulu is claiming they can only support flash, sounds like two CEO's had dinner last night and said hey I know how we can get back at apple for pissing in our sand box.

This comes out right after the Adobe love letter and now Hulu is claiming they can only support flash, sounds like two CEO's had dinner last night and said hey I know how we can get back at apple for pissing in our sand box.

Video streaming service Hulu posted and quickly retracted an item on its official blog Thursday, in which the company stated that it doesn't see HTML5 in its immediate future.
...
The statement would seem to finally put to rest lingering rumors that Hulu might convert to HTML5 for an iPad-friendly site. But it does not mean that iPad users will not be able to access Hulu.

Wouldn't being "quickly retracted" seem to indicate the opposite (that they do have plans to make it available)?
Leave it up stating that it is something they are not considering at this time but they are watching what happens would be more indicatvie of them not doing it.

Hulu no longer has content worth a crap so who cares if they stick with flash the rest of their existence. I boxeed my appletv over a year ago, but because hulu content gets worse and worse I no longer view it with the apple tv. It was a great idea, but powerful people must hate hulu because their content is worse and worse.

This forum is going down a typical path. If Apple doesn't allow you to have something, then you didn't want it anyway.

The MLB.com At Bat iPhone app has been streaming video with HTML5 since last summer, and it also supports authentication of an MLB.TV subscription. Apparently the folks at Hulu are jut too lazy, or are getting paid off by Adobe. My vote is for the latter.

This forum is going down a typical path. If Apple doesn't allow you to have something, then you didn't want it anyway.

You can say that if you want, but i gave everyone specific examples of declining content of very popular TV programs on this forum. We already knew their movie selection was a joke, but that was ok when the tv content was strong.

Hulu doesn't own the content, they license it from the companies who do. The companies who own the content choose to do with it what they feel is in their best interest not what's in Hulu's best interst.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevetim

My main point is their relevance in this Flash/HTML5 debate. Who cares what they think if the deteriation of their content continues. Hulu was my favorite site a year ago and now I never visit because the really good shows have pulled away. IE Comedy central programming. There was a time when I could watch every episode of programs like Lost or 24, now you can only get to past 4 or 5. For example go to hulu and try to watch a Burn Notice episode. Sorry it doesn't exist. Something is clearly changing for the bad for them. Probably not their fault.

So if they continue this path of declining content, who cares what technologies they use because eventually nobody will go to their site anyway. Content Content Content!

This comes out right after the Adobe love letter and now Hulu is claiming they can only support flash, sounds like two CEO's had dinner last night and said hey I know how we can get back at apple for pissing in our sand box.

Hulu doesn't own the content, they license it from the companies who do. The companies who own the content choose to do with it what they feel is in their best interest not what's in Hulu's best interst.

Hulu is telling the truth. HTML5 cannot perform all the functions that Hulu requires. MLB does not do what Hulu does with it's video.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galley

The MLB.com At Bat iPhone app has been streaming video with HTML5 since last summer, and it also supports authentication of an MLB.TV subscription. Apparently the folks at Hulu are jut too lazy, or are getting paid off by Adobe. My vote is for the latter.

Hulu no longer has content worth a crap so who cares if they stick with flash the rest of their existence. I boxeed my appletv over a year ago, but because hulu content gets worse and worse I no longer view it with the apple tv. It was a great idea, but powerful people must hate hulu because their content is worse and worse.

All that crap should be done on the server. Why is all that logic embedded in the player anyways? Heck, can it do my dishes too?

You don't seem to understand exactly how specific the information that they can gather from a flash based player is. It isn't simply that you watched the video and clicked on an ad; it's how long you watched, where you skipped around to, where you started, where you ended, what resolution you watched it at, what volume you used, whether or not you used closed captioning, and most importantly, whether or not you clicked on the embedded ad link (and at what point).

When I was at Macworld back when flash video was first taking off, I saw a demo of all the information that can be gathered from it and what a boon it would be for advertisers. That all has to be done within the player, and HTML5 simply doesn't have that functionality. Or, you know, a definitive codec.

You don't get it, do you? This is the same company that is forced by the content providers to actively block people from viewing their content on TVs on devices that are otherwise PCs. They want you to view their content the way they want you to, not the way you want to. This is not new, and it has nothing to do with Apple or Adobe, as much as you want it to.